4 ms·

More likely a pickup. Still, that's a small % of the overall market, which is mostly headed in the direction of hatchbacks, crossovers, and SUVs. The reason For

by jrs95 9y ago

More likely a pickup. Still, that's a small % of the overall market, which is mostly headed in the direction of hatchbacks, crossovers, and SUVs. The reason Ford is staying in the truck market but greatly de-emphasizing it's sedans is that their trucks are generally considered to be the best you can get, and with their sedans its the opposite. It would be a major investment for them to try and compete with everyone in that segment even if it weren't shrinking. Although for what it's worth, their newest crossover, the EcoSport, is basically just a taller Fiesta (arguably their best sedan/hatchback despite it being the cheapest). Anyways, in many regards the growing segment of the market is more like sedans/hatchbacks on stilts than it is like trucks.

Elv13 9y ago
Also, pickups most probably wont ever be "designed" to be self driving cars. They may have that has an option in the distant future. But given they are (supposed) to be farm/woodland/workhorses vehicles, they will stay mostly as they are for a very, very long time and give Ford a century to adapt (or milk the cow, kill the cow, eat the cow and close shop). The US/Canada is full of thousand of miles of woodland tracks and farmland unpaved tracks self driving vehicle will never be able to map. So unless they can drive fully on instruments including snow and very close trees. People really do live at the end of these tracks (at least in the Appalachians) and owns pickup trucks just to get home (and the status symbol thing). As for the pickups as "status symbol", it's irrelevant because the very symbol is the offroad "real work, real duty, real matcho mens" factor. Given Ford seems (as an outside observer) not to care about electric and self driving, focusing on bigger Lincolns and the F-series makes total sense as a business plan. 1) Let the other spend their billions developing their hipster tech 2) Use reliable incomes that will outlive any trend 3) Get mature technology on the cheap once it's commonplace. 4) Ignore "carmaker has a service" because it's not their core competence and there will be profitless races to the bottom by the "data warehouse" players (rather than profit for the carmakers) 5) Profit
- michaelmrose 9y ago
  Almost all trucks are used like cars in the same environments 99.9% of the time with the added ability to haul things. The use case you describe is best served by having a manual override button and retaining a traditional steering wheel as opposed to having a different more manual product
  - Elv13 9y ago
    True, but that's not the marketing they want. And the market segment that buys these things are very sensitive to this mythical image. "True" trucks is a selling point, not a liability for that crowd. When they sell a pickup to someone who doesn't need one (>85% of the sales), they sell the myth and the social status. So, as my last paragraph pointed out, they will but "not self driving" as a "status symbol" and they will sell like hotcakes. Plus, the advantages of self driving for cars you own, considering the current price premium, wont be worth it for many, many years. For cars you /rent/ fine, they will "work" 24/7, but spending 15k-25k on LiDAR and sensors and data and engineers and (carmaker) insurances isn't worth it yet for a car that spends 98% of it's useful life parked.
    - michaelmrose 9y ago
      25k worth of lidar makes it worthless for most market segments I think. Lacking self driving features will ensure that the insurance costs 3 times as much ultimately. It will eventually be cheaper to have self driving capability than pay premiums.
      - jstanley 9y ago
        Do you expect accident rates among manually-driven cars to substantially increase? If not, why do you expect insurance premiums to substantially increase?
        michaelmrose 9y ago
        I expect accident rates to fall due to safety features but ultimately expect almost everyone to stop driving their car and pay relative to now much less for insurance. As the safety of the majority rests largely on getting the remaining idiots off the road i expect them to pay punitive insurance rates not dissimilar to sin taxes discouraging behaviors that are disadvantageous to society. Im short a small group of people requires a greater cost to profitably insure plus sin taxes for insisting on endangering your fellow citizens vs falling rates for everyone else.

by jrs95 9y ago

Elv13 9y ago

Also, pickups most probably wont ever be "designed" to be self driving cars. They may have that has an option in the distant future. But given they are (supposed) to be farm/woodland/workhorses vehicles, they will stay mostly as they are for a very, very long time and give Ford a century to adapt (or milk the cow, kill the cow, eat the cow and close shop). The US/Canada is full of thousand of miles of woodland tracks and farmland unpaved tracks self driving vehicle will never be able to map. So unless they can drive fully on instruments including snow and very close trees. People really do live at the end of these tracks (at least in the Appalachians) and owns pickup trucks just to get home (and the status symbol thing). As for the pickups as "status symbol", it's irrelevant because the very symbol is the offroad "real work, real duty, real matcho mens" factor. Given Ford seems (as an outside observer) not to care about electric and self driving, focusing on bigger Lincolns and the F-series makes total sense as a business plan. 1) Let the other spend their billions developing their hipster tech 2) Use reliable incomes that will outlive any trend 3) Get mature technology on the cheap once it's commonplace. 4) Ignore "carmaker has a service" because it's not their core competence and there will be profitless races to the bottom by the "data warehouse" players (rather than profit for the carmakers) 5) Profit

michaelmrose 9y ago
Almost all trucks are used like cars in the same environments 99.9% of the time with the added ability to haul things. The use case you describe is best served by having a manual override button and retaining a traditional steering wheel as opposed to having a different more manual product
- Elv13 9y ago
  True, but that's not the marketing they want. And the market segment that buys these things are very sensitive to this mythical image. "True" trucks is a selling point, not a liability for that crowd. When they sell a pickup to someone who doesn't need one (>85% of the sales), they sell the myth and the social status. So, as my last paragraph pointed out, they will but "not self driving" as a "status symbol" and they will sell like hotcakes. Plus, the advantages of self driving for cars you own, considering the current price premium, wont be worth it for many, many years. For cars you /rent/ fine, they will "work" 24/7, but spending 15k-25k on LiDAR and sensors and data and engineers and (carmaker) insurances isn't worth it yet for a car that spends 98% of it's useful life parked.
  - michaelmrose 9y ago
    25k worth of lidar makes it worthless for most market segments I think. Lacking self driving features will ensure that the insurance costs 3 times as much ultimately. It will eventually be cheaper to have self driving capability than pay premiums.
    - jstanley 9y ago
      Do you expect accident rates among manually-driven cars to substantially increase? If not, why do you expect insurance premiums to substantially increase?
      - michaelmrose 9y ago
        I expect accident rates to fall due to safety features but ultimately expect almost everyone to stop driving their car and pay relative to now much less for insurance. As the safety of the majority rests largely on getting the remaining idiots off the road i expect them to pay punitive insurance rates not dissimilar to sin taxes discouraging behaviors that are disadvantageous to society. Im short a small group of people requires a greater cost to profitably insure plus sin taxes for insisting on endangering your fellow citizens vs falling rates for everyone else.